Sunday, March 31, 2013

Indeed if you think of it, besides the tens of tons of uranium and plutonium that was detected in published EPA air samples, a vast amount settled out of the air into the Pacific. Of course, cesium and strontium accompany the overall mess.

The sea critters have been directly and daily exposed to the toxic and radioactive heavy metals and body invaders.

Cesium has about a 80 day biological half life. It goes into your muscles and heart, but some of it is excreted. However, if you are continually exposed to cesium, that doesn't help, you reach an equilibrium point and stay there.

Here is the data on tens of tons detected in the air. My research. EPA data.

Saturday, March 30, 2013

I love charts, they often tell you something that nothing else can. They knock you upside the head.

See this one on seal "grounding" rates

TEPCO "fesses up", so expect some big move in the near future, announcement of Nuclear plant startups. The power outage last week proves that TEPCO has learned nothing.

TEPCO officials denied Friday that the incident posed safety threats outside of the plant, but acknowledged they lacked sensitivity about how Fukushima residents felt about the loss of power and cooling. "We learned that it only takes one rat, not even an earthquake or tsunami, to paralyze the plant," said Yukihiro Higashi, an Iwaki Meisei University engineering professor who is on a government nuclear regulatory panel overseeing Fukushima Dai-ichi safety. "People in Fukushima are under constant fear of another serious incident that requires evacuation," Higashi said.

Tuesday, March 26, 2013

Here is another chart, it is hard to read as I did a screen capture. The full size chart is a download, but the service requires you to run an EXE program, which as you may know, can do anything at all to your computer, steal your passwords, beyond a zombie porn spam bot, whatever. So I won't ever run an EXE program. If you have more guts or less sense than me, here is the linkhttp://www.4shared.com/photo/J5RgNqnw/Rad-Chart.html?cau2=403tNull

AND HERE is a new resource, which goes into even more detail. But FIRST get your shelter in place kit ready (ABOVE), you might need it in the next week if they don't fix Fukushima power supply. Much of the below resources deal with nuclear attack, but in reality a Nuclear Plant meltdown is very similar, in fact the Nuke Plant can be far worse. In the Nuke bomb, a very large perfect of the radiation is Iodine which goes away 1/2 every 8 days, if you can shelter 24 days, then 7/8's have become harmless, but there are still other isotopes with half lives of 30 years and more, Cesium and Strontium as notable mentions.

The French have 58 nuclear plants, and a single one of them could wipe out 3 years of GDP. That would kill their country, and much of Europe as a domino effect. See the chart below, France likes to group their highest devices all together similar to Fukushima to achieve "lower operating cost". So usually they group 4 plants together, it one blows up it would affect the ability to prevent the others from blowing up.

Catastrophic nuclear accidents, like Chernobyl in 1986 or Fukushima No. 1 in 2011, are, we’re incessantly told, very rare, and their probability of occurring infinitesimal.

But when they do occur, they get costly. So costly that the French government, when it came up with cost estimates for an accident in France, kept them secret.

But now the report was leaked to the French magazine, Le Journal de Dimanche. Turns out, the upper end of the cost spectrum of an accident at the nuclear power plant at Dampierre, in the Department of Loiret in north-central France, amounted to over three times the country’s GDP.

Hence, the need to keep it secret.

The study was done in 2007 by the Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety (IRSN), a government agency under joint authority of the Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of Environment, Industry, Research, and Health.With over 1,700 employees, it’s France’s “public service expert in nuclear and radiation risks.” This isn’t some overambitious, publicity-hungry think tank.

It evaluated a range of disaster scenarios that might occur at the Dampierre plant. In the best-case scenario, costs came to €760 billion—more than a third of France’s GDP. At the other end of the spectrum: €5.8 trillion! Over three times France’s GDP. A devastating amount. So large that France could not possibly deal with it.

Yet, France gets 75% of its electricity from nuclear power. The entire nuclear sector is controlled by the state, which also owns 85% of EDF, the mega-utility that operates France’s 58 active nuclear reactors spread over 20 plants. So, three weeks ago, the Institute released a more politically correct report for public consumption. It pegged the cost of an accident at €430 billion.

The nuclear meltdown at Chernobyl 20 years ago this month, even more than my launch of perestroika, was perhaps the real cause of the collapse of the Soviet Union five years later. Indeed, the Chernobyl catastrophe was an historic turning point: there was the era before the disaster, and there is the very different era that has followed.

CommentsThe very morning of the explosion at the Chernobyl nuclear station on April 26, 1986, the Politburo met to discuss the situation, and then organized a government commission to deal with the consequences.

German Report on Fukushima, Interview with ex Prime Minister Kan

Excellent video, German reporters in Japan, investigating Fukushima.

For anyone doubting how the Nuke Cartel operates, this is the smoking gun.

The whole lies, report fabrications, regulatory capture, are laid bare in this sub-titled report. At minutes 11 and 16 ex Prime Minister Kan details in no uncertain terms how the Nuclear Village operates through lies, extortion, personnel insertions into government and then back into TEPCO.

This is coming right from the top. This has been reviewed by a Japanese national who is also fluent in English and they agree that the translation is absolutely correct.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------985,000 cancer death from Chernobyl, and millions more disease.

No, not buying the pronuke lies. ZING, bodyslam, you are down for the count.

Sunday, March 10, 2013

I got up at 3AM on 3-16-2011 and decided that I needed to form an opinion about how bad Fukushima really was. We have family on the far other side of Tokyo from the Fukushima, and I wanted to be able to provide an opinion.

Working with the available resources, many conflicted. I determined that this was a serious and large problem.

Read that old story here. Obviously my nuke knowledge was a lot less back then, but the call was correct, and actually it has turned out far worse than I envisioned at the time.

Why the WHO World Health Organization cannot be trusted

------------------------------------------

from

Toxic link: the WHO and the IAEA

A 50-year-old agreement with the IAEA has effectively gagged the WHO from telling the truth about the health risks of radiation

Fifty years ago, on 28 May 1959, the World Health Organisation's assembly voted into force an obscure but important agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency – the United Nations "Atoms for Peace" organisation, founded just two years before in 1957. The effect of this agreement has been to give the IAEA an effective veto on any actions by the WHO that relate in any way to nuclear power – and so prevent the WHO from playing its proper role in investigating and warning of the dangers of nuclear radiation on human health.

The WHO's objective is to promote "the attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health", while the IAEA's mission is to "accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy to peace, health and prosperity throughout the world"

This is the actual agreement, making the WHO subservient to the nuke promoters IAEA

It list many sources of information about nuclear bombs and power. Check it out. Placing this on my blogroll also. Really good stuff.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Web-based Primary Sources for Nuclear History

Posted November 14th, 2011 by Alex Wellerstein Right now, across the world, there are students taking or planning on taking courses on the history of the atomic bomb. The history of the bomb has been and will probably always be (for better or worse) a relevant topic, and students are drawn to it for a variety of reasons. Some are better than others…

We all know that the long term costs of nuke power are huge, but now the truth comes out...they don't even make sense now. Vogtle is starting to admit the cost overruns. Note that historically, cost overruns of 250% are the norm.

Even at the original budget, Vogtle would have only returned 1.666% annual rate of return on investment. No investor wants that, that is why they force the ratepayers to pay now, to become captive "investors". It simple, because they can't find any real investors who want to take the deal.

Who wants to invest in a project? You have to pay your money now, and then in 6 to 8 years, then we will start paying you back at 1.666%. Unless there are cost overruns, which must then chip in more money, whatever we tell you. And if you don't pony up, we just stop the plant and you lose all your money.

-------------------------------------------------------

ATLANTA — As the cost of building a new nuclear plant soars, there are signs of buyer's remorse.The second-guessing from officials in Georgia and Florida is a sign that maybe the nation is not quite ready for a nuclear renaissance. On top of construction costs running much higher than expected, the price of natural gas has plummeted, making it tough for nuclear plants to compete in the energy market.In Georgia last week, Southern Co. told regulators it needed to raise its construction budget for Plant Vogtle in eastern Georgia by $737 million to $6.85 billion. At about the same time, a Georgia lawmaker sought to penalize the company for going over budget, announcing a proposal to cut into Southern Co.'s profits by trimming some of the money its subsidiary Georgia Power makes.